Looking at all the polls out there, the general consensus is that Sen. Barack Obama has more than the 270 electoral votes he needs to become the next president of the United States.
So, what does Sen. John McCain have to do in order to win?
There are 20 states in which McCain is safely ahead. They are Alabama (9 electoral votes), Alaska (3), Arizona (10), Arkansas (6), Georgia (15), Idaho (4), Kansas (6), Kentucky (8), Louisiana (9), Mississippi (6), Nebraska (5), North Dakota (3), Oklahoma (7), South Carolina (8), South Dakota (3), Tennessee (11), Texas (34), Utah (5), West Virginia (5) and Wyoming (3).
Some polls have Arizona, North Dakota and Georgia in play. Matter of fact, Obama is making a huge media buy in Arizona during the final hours of the race. But the bottom line is that McCain cannot afford to lose any of these states. They account for 160 electoral votes, which is 90 short of what he needs.
The toss-up states are Indiana (11), Missouri (11), Montana (3), North Carolina (15), Nevada (5), and Ohio (20). George Bush won all those states in 2004, and they account for 65 electoral votes. Polls in these states are to close to call, and McCain has to win them all. But even then, he's 45 electoral votes short.
That means he needs a few states that are leaning toward Obama in the polls. The most likely candidates are Florida (27), North Carolina (13) and Colorado (9), where polls have Obama up by three to five percentage points. Winning all of them would put him over the top at 274, but he would have to come from behind to grab them.
McCain is pushing hard in Pennsylvania (21). There must be internal polls telling his campaign that it is possible for him to win there, but the external public polls all have Obama with strong leads. Some even say Obama is up by as much as 14 percentage points in Pennsylvania. If he did snag the Keystone state, it would give him some breathing room elsewhere in the country.
Still, all in all, a tall order for the Arizona senator in the coming days.
Showing posts with label McCain. Show all posts
Showing posts with label McCain. Show all posts
Saturday, November 1, 2008
Friday, October 31, 2008
Live From New York, It's McCain on 'SNL'
Sen. Barack Obama had his infomerical, now Sen. John McCain is countering with a last-minute appearance on "Saturday Night Live," The Associated Press reports this morning.
Aides to the Republican presidential candidate said Friday that McCain will make a detour from battleground states to appear on "Saturday Night Live," the late-night show that has been a must-watch for many during the political season.
Hosting the show this Saturday is actor Ben Affleck, a supporter of Democratic candidate Barack Obama. The musical guest is singer David Cook.
When McCain's running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, appeared on the show Oct. 18, "Saturday Night Live" earned its best ratings in 14 years. Former star and head writer Tina Fey, a Palin lookalike, has been at the center of the show's recent parodies of the campaign.
"SNL" regular Darrell Hammond impersonates McCain on the late-night show, now in its 34th season.
McCain last appeared on "Saturday Night Live" in May, after clinching the nomination and while the Democratic primary continued. The 72-year-old Arizona senator joked about his age, saying: "I ask you, what should we be looking for in our next president? Certainly, someone who is very, very, very old."
Friday, October 24, 2008
Is the Fat Lady Singing Yet for McCain? Can McCain Win?
With less than two weeks to go until Election Day, the Conventional Wisdom in the media, and therefore the country, is that Sen. Barack Obama will not only win the presidency in November, but it will be an electoral map that fundamentally change politics in Washington for years to come.
Almost every pollster is reporting an advantage for the Democrat by about 10 points on average, and it is a lead that is growing every day. Not only is Obama poised to crush Sen. John McCain, but Democrats are predicting a 60-member caucus in the upcoming U.S. Senate. That would give them the majority they need to have a free hand in enacting any law, any policy, and spend any amount of money they wish without being concerned with a pesky Republican filibuster. Over in the House, Speaker Nancy Pelosi is anticipating 250 Democrats, which would be 57 percent of that body.
For Republicans, it would be two years of legislative hell.
But there are some in the media who question whether the Fat Lady is already singing.
For instance, Adam Nagourney of The New York Times (which, by the way, has officially endorsed Obama) wrote yesterday that McCain's supporters, and even some Democrats, see a possible path for a GOP victory:
He goes on to write that GOP insiders are jumping on two recent remarks by the Obama campaign that they see have touched a nerve and can turn the tide. One is Obama's comment about "spreading the wealth" during his impromptu meeting with the famous "Joe the Plumber." The second is Sen. Joe Biden's comment that Obama will be intentionally tested in the first six months in office. Both comments, the GOP insiders say, can spur the base to come out and vote.
Some people in the media look for outside forces to hurt Obama's chances rather than helping McCain's. Peggy Noonan, writing in the Wall Street Journal, had this to offer this week:
OK, that might fall under the GOP Wishful Thinking Department. But stranger things have happened in the world of politics.
There is one more thing to consider, and that's about the polling. Obama is absolutely crushing McCain every which way in the polls. I can't imagine what it is like to be McCain's chief pollster as he/she walks into that morning briefing with the boss to deliver more bad news. But polls have been known to be wrong, and they do not count one iota in making the final decision.
Sen. John Kerry was told on Election Day in 2004 that the exit polls gave him a comfortable lead in Ohio, and throughout the afternoon he had thought he had crossed the finish line first. But there was a fatal flaw in the methodology. The pollsters canvassed mostly urban areas, giving Kerry an edge in their calculations.
This year, pollsters' interviewing samples are predominately Democrats, justifying it as "the makeup of the country." For instance, this clip from CNN is from its debate roundup in which the sample had 38 percent Democrats and 31 percent Republicans, which is roughly a one-fourth difference.
Surprisingly, Obama came out ahead in that poll. While it gave the country the image that Obama had scored better, the only thing one can really pull from the result is that Obama will win a poll that has more Democrats than Republicans.
The other problem with that is, of course, are whether those people are actually going to vote. Will every Democrat come through on Election night? Traditionally, they don't. Republicans have been the ones who come out to vote in greater numbers, even though there are more Democrats registered in the country. Kerry was counting on a large youth turnout. It didn't happen, because young people do not traditionally vote in large numbers. This year, Obama is counting on a large turnout from newly registered people, including youth, and that's why he is urging them to actually vote and not become complacent with all the news that he has already won.
Once again, it's up to you, the voter, to decide. The media, the pollsters, and the pundits all individually have the same influence on the election as you do, and that's one vote. If McCain pulls this out, it's probably not because of a Bradley Effect, it would be because of apathy on the Democratic side.
Almost every pollster is reporting an advantage for the Democrat by about 10 points on average, and it is a lead that is growing every day. Not only is Obama poised to crush Sen. John McCain, but Democrats are predicting a 60-member caucus in the upcoming U.S. Senate. That would give them the majority they need to have a free hand in enacting any law, any policy, and spend any amount of money they wish without being concerned with a pesky Republican filibuster. Over in the House, Speaker Nancy Pelosi is anticipating 250 Democrats, which would be 57 percent of that body.
For Republicans, it would be two years of legislative hell.
But there are some in the media who question whether the Fat Lady is already singing.
For instance, Adam Nagourney of The New York Times (which, by the way, has officially endorsed Obama) wrote yesterday that McCain's supporters, and even some Democrats, see a possible path for a GOP victory:
“The McCain campaign is roughly in the position where Vice President Gore was running against President Bush one week before the election of 2000,” said Steve Schmidt, Mr. McCain’s chief strategist. “We have ground to make up, but we believe we can make it up.”
... Mr. McCain’s advisers said the key to victory was reeling back those Republican states where Mr. Obama has them on the run: Florida, where Mr. McCain spent Thursday; Indiana; Missouri; North Carolina; Ohio; and Virginia. If he can hang on to all those states as well as others that are reliably red, he would put into his column 260 of the 270 electoral votes necessary to win. Mr. McCain’s advisers said they would look for the additional electoral votes they need either by taking Pennsylvania from the Democrats, or putting together some combination of Colorado, Nevada, New Hampshire and New Mexico.
Mr. McCain’s advisers are most concerned about Virginia, and understandably so. On the other side of the coin, Mr. McCain’s advisers believe that if he wins or comes close in Pennsylvania, he will probably win in Ohio and Florida. Aides to Mr. McCain and Mr. Obama agree that Mr. McCain remains very much in the game in Ohio and Florida. Not easy, but not impossible either.
He goes on to write that GOP insiders are jumping on two recent remarks by the Obama campaign that they see have touched a nerve and can turn the tide. One is Obama's comment about "spreading the wealth" during his impromptu meeting with the famous "Joe the Plumber." The second is Sen. Joe Biden's comment that Obama will be intentionally tested in the first six months in office. Both comments, the GOP insiders say, can spur the base to come out and vote.
Some people in the media look for outside forces to hurt Obama's chances rather than helping McCain's. Peggy Noonan, writing in the Wall Street Journal, had this to offer this week:
And yet: It's not over. For one thing, Mr. McCain has got to be reading Steven Stark's piece in the Boston Phoenix, which imagines the forces that could produce a McCain upset. What if Mr. Obama underperforms on Election Day, just as he did in the final primaries with Hillary Clinton? What if senior citizens turn out in record numbers and vote for the older guy, and the financial crisis seems to fade, and Mr. McCain finds new grounding on the issue of taxes, and the Obama campaign undermines itself with premature triumphalism . . .
Mr. McCain has endless faith in his ability to come back. He's been doing it for 40 years, from Vietnam, where, with the injuries he'd sustained and the torture he experienced, he might have died, was likely to die, and yet survived, to exactly a year ago, when he was out of money and out of luck. And then he won New Hampshire. When he says, "We got 'em where we want 'em" he must mean: They think they are looking at a corpse. No one in politics has so repeatedly relished coming back from the dead."
OK, that might fall under the GOP Wishful Thinking Department. But stranger things have happened in the world of politics.
There is one more thing to consider, and that's about the polling. Obama is absolutely crushing McCain every which way in the polls. I can't imagine what it is like to be McCain's chief pollster as he/she walks into that morning briefing with the boss to deliver more bad news. But polls have been known to be wrong, and they do not count one iota in making the final decision.
Sen. John Kerry was told on Election Day in 2004 that the exit polls gave him a comfortable lead in Ohio, and throughout the afternoon he had thought he had crossed the finish line first. But there was a fatal flaw in the methodology. The pollsters canvassed mostly urban areas, giving Kerry an edge in their calculations.
This year, pollsters' interviewing samples are predominately Democrats, justifying it as "the makeup of the country." For instance, this clip from CNN is from its debate roundup in which the sample had 38 percent Democrats and 31 percent Republicans, which is roughly a one-fourth difference.
Surprisingly, Obama came out ahead in that poll. While it gave the country the image that Obama had scored better, the only thing one can really pull from the result is that Obama will win a poll that has more Democrats than Republicans.
The other problem with that is, of course, are whether those people are actually going to vote. Will every Democrat come through on Election night? Traditionally, they don't. Republicans have been the ones who come out to vote in greater numbers, even though there are more Democrats registered in the country. Kerry was counting on a large youth turnout. It didn't happen, because young people do not traditionally vote in large numbers. This year, Obama is counting on a large turnout from newly registered people, including youth, and that's why he is urging them to actually vote and not become complacent with all the news that he has already won.
Once again, it's up to you, the voter, to decide. The media, the pollsters, and the pundits all individually have the same influence on the election as you do, and that's one vote. If McCain pulls this out, it's probably not because of a Bradley Effect, it would be because of apathy on the Democratic side.
She Made It Up! McCain Worker Faked Stabbing Incident
Police sources told KDKA in Pittsburgh this afternoon that a McCain campaign worker from Texas has confessed to making up an accusation that a mugger attacked her and cut the letter "B" in her face after seeing her McCain bumper sticker on her car.
Ashley Todd, 20, of Texas, initially told police that she was robbed at an ATM in Bloomfield and that the suspect became enraged and started beating her after seeing her GOP sticker on her car.
Police investigating the alleged attack, however, began to notice some inconsistencies in her story and administered a polygraph test.
Authorities, however, declined to release the results of that test.
Investigators did say that they received photos from the ATM machine and "the photographs were verified as not being the victim making the transaction."
This afternoon, a Pittsburgh police commander told KDKA Investigator Marty Griffin that Todd confessed to making up the story.
The commander added that Todd will face charges; but police have not commented on what those charges will be.
According to police, investigators working on the interview process detected several inconsistencies in Todd's story that differed from statements made in the original police report.
Pittsburgh Police Public Information Officer Diane Richard released a statement earlier today, saying: "Because of the inconsistencies in her statements, Ms. Todd was asked to submit to a polygraph examination which she agreed to do."
No photos of Todd are being released by Pittsburgh Police at this time.
The investigation is continuing as officials determine what charges will be filed.
Thursday, October 23, 2008
McCain Supporter Assaulted, Stabbed in Pittsburgh
UPDATE, 3 p.m. Eastern, Oct. 24: Police say the woman admitted that her story of being stabbed is a hoax.
A 20-year-old woman who was robbed at an ATM in the Pittsburgh area last night was also maimed by her attacker when the assailant noticed a McCain bumper sticker on her car, police said.
Police told local media that the robber took $60 from the woman, then became angry when he saw a McCain bumper sticker on the victim's car. The attacker then punched and kicked the victim, before using the knife to scratch the letter "B" into her face, Richard said.
The woman refused medical treatment after the assault, which happened outside the view of the bank's surveillance cameras, police said.
Here is a video report from CBS' KDKA, Channel 2 in Pittsburgh.
In Central Florida, The home of a Republican headquarters manager was shot up and damaged over his support of Sen. John McCain, the man told police. Media reports said. Rog Coverely said several pellets pierced his Longwood home. Coverely showed several spiderwebbed-holes in the front windows of his home.
The Republican manager said he is convinced he was targeted because of new McCain signs he added around his home. "It says this campaign is getting vicious," he said.
A 20-year-old woman who was robbed at an ATM in the Pittsburgh area last night was also maimed by her attacker when the assailant noticed a McCain bumper sticker on her car, police said.
Police told local media that the robber took $60 from the woman, then became angry when he saw a McCain bumper sticker on the victim's car. The attacker then punched and kicked the victim, before using the knife to scratch the letter "B" into her face, Richard said.
The woman refused medical treatment after the assault, which happened outside the view of the bank's surveillance cameras, police said.
Here is a video report from CBS' KDKA, Channel 2 in Pittsburgh.
In Central Florida, The home of a Republican headquarters manager was shot up and damaged over his support of Sen. John McCain, the man told police. Media reports said. Rog Coverely said several pellets pierced his Longwood home. Coverely showed several spiderwebbed-holes in the front windows of his home.
The Republican manager said he is convinced he was targeted because of new McCain signs he added around his home. "It says this campaign is getting vicious," he said.
Friday, October 17, 2008
VIDEO: McCain to Letterman: I Screwed Up
Sen. John McCain had his long-awaited appearance on "Late Night With David Letterman" last night where he apologized to Letterman for canceling his previous engagement. He talks about the race, Joe the Plumber, and how to capture Osama Bin Laden. He also pledges to Letterman that his first executive order will be to raise David's taxes.
VIDEO: McCain, Obama Bring House Down at Alfred Smith Dinner
Sens. John McCain and Barack Obama both spoke last night at the Alfred E. Smith dinner n New York, which is traditionally the last side-by-side appearance of two presidential candidates before an election. It is always an opportunity for the candidates to poke fun at each other and themselves.
The roast, which raised $3.9 million to help underprivileged children, is dedicated to the memory of former Democratic New York Gov. Al Smith, the first Catholic to win the presidential nomination of a major political party, who lost to Republican Herbert Hoover in 1928 in a landslide.
McCain got the most laughs, taking jabs at himself, Hillary and Bill Clinton, and Obama. He even took a stab at Keith Olbermann and the folks at MSNBC. Both Hillary and Obama got good laughs from McCain. Here is Part 1 of his speech:
Here is part 2 of McCain's speech, where he praises Obama for his accomplishments during the campaign:
Here is Obama's speech. He took on himself with remarks about his ears and his middle name, which he said was actually "Steve." He got some groans comparing the dinner to an AIG event, but overall he was gracious and entertaining as well.
The roast, which raised $3.9 million to help underprivileged children, is dedicated to the memory of former Democratic New York Gov. Al Smith, the first Catholic to win the presidential nomination of a major political party, who lost to Republican Herbert Hoover in 1928 in a landslide.
McCain got the most laughs, taking jabs at himself, Hillary and Bill Clinton, and Obama. He even took a stab at Keith Olbermann and the folks at MSNBC. Both Hillary and Obama got good laughs from McCain. Here is Part 1 of his speech:
Here is part 2 of McCain's speech, where he praises Obama for his accomplishments during the campaign:
Here is Obama's speech. He took on himself with remarks about his ears and his middle name, which he said was actually "Steve." He got some groans comparing the dinner to an AIG event, but overall he was gracious and entertaining as well.
Sunday, October 12, 2008
London Media: Obama Will Win Big; Palin in it for Herself
The London media has started to run its post-mortem stories on the McCain campaign.
Sarah Baxter of The Sunday Times of London says internal infighting in the McCain camp have opened a rift between Sen. John McCain and Gov. Sarah Palin, and that the vice presidential pick is now in it for herself.
The London Telegraph, talking to senior Obama advisors, says the campaign believes it will be an Obama landslide:
Sarah Baxter of The Sunday Times of London says internal infighting in the McCain camp have opened a rift between Sen. John McCain and Gov. Sarah Palin, and that the vice presidential pick is now in it for herself.
McCain has become alarmed about the fury unleashed by Sarah Palin, the moose-hunting “pitbull in lipstick”, against Senator Barack Obama. Cries of “terrorist” and “kill him” have accompanied the tirades by the governor of Alaska against the Democratic nominee at Republican rallies.
Mark Salter, McCain’s long-serving chief of staff, is understood to have told campaign insiders that he would prefer his boss, a former Vietnam prisoner of war, to suffer an “honourable defeat” rather than conduct a campaign that would be out of character – and likely to lose him the election.
Palin, 44, has led the character attacks on Obama in the belief that McCain may be throwing away the election and her chance of becoming vice-president. Her supporters think that if the Republican ticket loses on November 4, she should run for president in 2012.
A leading Republican consultant said: “A lot of conservatives are grumbling about what a poor job McCain is doing. They are rolling their eyes and saying, ‘Yes, a miracle could happen, but at this rate it is all over’.
“Sarah Palin is no fool. She sees the same thing and wants to salvage what she can. She is positioning herself for the future. Her best days could be in front of her. She wants to look as though she was the fighter, the person with the spunk who was out there taking it to the Democrats.”
The London Telegraph, talking to senior Obama advisors, says the campaign believes it will be an Obama landslide:
Their optimism, which is said to be shared by the Democratic candidate himself, is based on information from private polling and on faith in the powerful political organisation he has built in the key swing states.
Insiders say that Mr Obama's apparent calm through an unusually turbulent election season is because he believes that his strength among first time voters in several key states has been underestimated, both by the media and by the Republican Party.
Mr Obama has come under fire from within Democratic ranks over his message and his tactics. Critics say he has failed to connect with the blue-collar workers seen as crucial to winning the election, and too reluctant to make direct attacks on Mr McCain.
But his aides are convinced that he has a strong chance of winning no fewer than nine states won by George W.Bush in the closely contested 2000 election, including former Republican strongholds like North Carolina, Virginia and even Indiana, which have not voted Democrat for a generation.
Friday, October 10, 2008
McCain Defends Obama to Angry Supporters and Gets Booed
It's a bad sign for your presidential aspirations when you are forced repeatedly to defend your opponent at your own rallies.
Sen. John McCain faced a booing crowd today for rebuking a man who said he would be "scared ... to bring a child up" if Sen. Barack Obama was elected president. "I have to tell you he is a decent person and a person that you do not have to be scared of as president of the United States," McCain said.
McCain supporters have become increasingly vocal during the past two days, voicing their concerns about Obama, but using the long discredited rhetoric that he is Muslim, a terrorist or an Arab. When McCain has come to Obama's defends, the crowds have booed him.
One woman at a town-hall meeting in Minnesota told McCain, "I can't trust Obama. I have read about him and he's not he's not uh—he's an Arab. He's not—" before McCain reached out for the microphone and told the rally: "No, ma'am, he's a decent family man and citizen that I just happen to have disagreements with on fundamental issues and that's what this campaign's all about. He's not an Arab."
Jonathan Martin and Amiee Parnes of Politico pick up the story:
Sen. John McCain faced a booing crowd today for rebuking a man who said he would be "scared ... to bring a child up" if Sen. Barack Obama was elected president. "I have to tell you he is a decent person and a person that you do not have to be scared of as president of the United States," McCain said.
McCain supporters have become increasingly vocal during the past two days, voicing their concerns about Obama, but using the long discredited rhetoric that he is Muslim, a terrorist or an Arab. When McCain has come to Obama's defends, the crowds have booed him.
One woman at a town-hall meeting in Minnesota told McCain, "I can't trust Obama. I have read about him and he's not he's not uh—he's an Arab. He's not—" before McCain reached out for the microphone and told the rally: "No, ma'am, he's a decent family man and citizen that I just happen to have disagreements with on fundamental issues and that's what this campaign's all about. He's not an Arab."
Jonathan Martin and Amiee Parnes of Politico pick up the story:
In addition to the man who said he feared Obama as president, another predicted the Democrat would “lead the country to socialism.”
“The time has come and the Bible tells us you speak the truth and that the truth sets you free,” the man added.
Yet another voter implored McCain in plain terms: "The people here in Minnesota want to see a real fight."
McCain promised the audience he wouldn’t back down—but again sought to tamp down emotions.
"We want to fight, and I will fight," McCain said. "But I will be respectful. I admire Sen. Obama and his accomplishments and I will respect him."
At which point he was booed again.
"I don't mean that has to reduce your ferocity," he added over the jeers. "I just mean to say you have to be respectful."
The anger is plainly worrying McCain and his campaign. Already viewed with skepticism by the conservative base, they don’t want to throw a proverbial wet blanket over the enthusiasm of the worker bees of the party. But they also fear a backlash from less partisan—and still undecided—voters seeing clips of the angry activists on TV and online.
“He’s not going to stand there while somebody says something he disagrees with and not make his view known,” said Brian Rogers, a McCain spokesman after the Minnesota event. “He’s never been afraid to get boos from his own audience. That’s always been John McCain’s thing.”
But Rogers said the campaign would continue its own increasingly character-based line of assault.
“There are legitimate questions about Barack Obama. We’re going to raise them and do that compellingly. But when people go over the line in John McCain’s opinion he’ll be open and honest about it.”
Asked if some of the shots McCain and Palin have taken against Obama on the stump and in TV ads may be contributing to the raw emotions, Rogers said such sentiments were “garbage.”
“The idea that we should not question Obama’s record and readiness to be president is offensive to democracy,” he said.
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Hours Before Debate, McCain Has Doubts About Ifill
Sen. John McCain is having second thoughts about the selection of PBS' Gwen Ifill as the moderator of tonight's vice presidential debate between Sen. Joe Biden and Gov. Sarah Palin.
Yesterday, McCain had expressed confidence in Ifill. Today, he soften that view while speaking on FOX's "Fox and Friends"
“Frankly, I wish they had picked a moderator that isn’t writing a book favorable to Barack Obama — let's face it," McCain said. "But I have to have confidence that Gwen Ifill will handle this as the professional journalist that she is. Life isn’t fair ..."
Word came out yesterday that Ifill had written a book that is seen as pro-Obama. That book is to be released in January, and stands to make more money for Ifill if Obama wins the election next month.
McCain had a different view yesterday when asked about Ifill, telling FOX:
"I think that Gwen Ifill is a professional, and I think that she will do a totally objective job because she is a highly respected professional. Does this help that if she has written a book that is favorable to Senator Obama? Probably not, but I have confidence that Gwen Ifill will do a professional job. And I have that confidence."
Palin told Sean Hannity today that the conflict would just make her "try harder." Here's their discussion:
Yesterday, McCain had expressed confidence in Ifill. Today, he soften that view while speaking on FOX's "Fox and Friends"
“Frankly, I wish they had picked a moderator that isn’t writing a book favorable to Barack Obama — let's face it," McCain said. "But I have to have confidence that Gwen Ifill will handle this as the professional journalist that she is. Life isn’t fair ..."
Word came out yesterday that Ifill had written a book that is seen as pro-Obama. That book is to be released in January, and stands to make more money for Ifill if Obama wins the election next month.
McCain had a different view yesterday when asked about Ifill, telling FOX:
"I think that Gwen Ifill is a professional, and I think that she will do a totally objective job because she is a highly respected professional. Does this help that if she has written a book that is favorable to Senator Obama? Probably not, but I have confidence that Gwen Ifill will do a professional job. And I have that confidence."
Palin told Sean Hannity today that the conflict would just make her "try harder." Here's their discussion:
HANNITY: Let me ask you one last question. There's been this issue that the moderator of tomorrow night's debate, Gwen Ifill, is apparently writing a book to come out the time the next president takes office, and apparently, I actually have the tape, and I'll play it for you. This is Gwen Ifill talking about the book and it seems very favorable to Barack Obama, I want to ask you out of this if you're concerned about it.
IFILL: My name is Gwen Ifill. I am the moderator and managing editor of Washington Week and a senior correspondent for the News Hour with Jim Lehrer. The title of the book is "The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama." It's taking the story of Barack Obama and extending it to cover a whole new generation of black politicians who are doing similar things in different ways.
HANNITY: Your thoughts, Governor, is that a concern at all to you?
PALIN: You know, I'm not going to let it be a concern. Let me just tell you that John McCain has been in an underdog position before, and this ticket, I think it is safe to say, is in an underdog position. But that's what makes us work harder. It makes us want to communicate more clearly and profoundly with the electorate, letting them know what the contrasts are between these two tickets, It's motivating to me, even, to hear Gwen's comments there because, again, it makes us work that much harder, and it provides even more fairness and objectivity and choices for the voters on Nov. 4, if we try that much harder.
McCain Concedes Michigan, Pulls Out Staff, Stops Advertising Spending
Is this the first sign of a white flag approach to campaigning?
Sen. John McCain's campaign is abandoning its efforts in Michigan, according to a report this afternoon in the Detroit Free Press.. McCain's campaign had thought it could win the Democratic-leaning state and its 17 electoral votes. But now, in a stunning move, has pulled up stakes and left the state.
Polling data had been bad for McCain all week nationally since the Wall Street financial crisis became the dominate news story. His suspension of the national campaign to return to Washington did not play well across America as polls indicated that most saw it as a political ploy. In Michigan, the Detroit Free Press-Local 4 Michigan poll last week showed Obama ahead by 13 points. Today, a poll by Public Policy Polling showed Obama ahead by 10. On Sept. 22, Rasmussen Reports had Obama up 51 percent to 44 percent. NBC/Mason-Dixon had it as a tie on Sept. 23. On that same date, CNN/Time reported Obama up by five percentage points.
Here is some of the Free Press report:
Sen. John McCain's campaign is abandoning its efforts in Michigan, according to a report this afternoon in the Detroit Free Press.. McCain's campaign had thought it could win the Democratic-leaning state and its 17 electoral votes. But now, in a stunning move, has pulled up stakes and left the state.
Polling data had been bad for McCain all week nationally since the Wall Street financial crisis became the dominate news story. His suspension of the national campaign to return to Washington did not play well across America as polls indicated that most saw it as a political ploy. In Michigan, the Detroit Free Press-Local 4 Michigan poll last week showed Obama ahead by 13 points. Today, a poll by Public Policy Polling showed Obama ahead by 10. On Sept. 22, Rasmussen Reports had Obama up 51 percent to 44 percent. NBC/Mason-Dixon had it as a tie on Sept. 23. On that same date, CNN/Time reported Obama up by five percentage points.
Here is some of the Free Press report:
Republican nominee John McCain’s campaign pulled the plug on its Michigan operation today with little to no forewarning to state GOP officials — and on a day when Democrat Barack Obama was already stumping in the state. It wasn’t clear what would be left of the McCain operation in the state, if anything, but it appeared that TV advertising and literature drops by the campaign would end and most of the paid staff would depart.
No reason was given for the decision to shut down the Michigan campaign, which was confirmed by state party chairman Saul Anuzis and others. Anuzis, who issued a statement late in the day, said “the winds that drive presidential campaigns can shift and shift suddenly. I have no doubt the campaign will be back.”
Staff will be moved to other battleground states, especially Wisconsin, Florida and Ohio.
... “Everybody’s just dumbfounded” by the decision, said a Republican Party source in Michigan.
Senate Bailout Bill: McCain and Obama Enjoy a Dish of Pork
Want to get something done on Capitol Hill? Here's the recipe.
Tons of pork
One cup of lobbyists
A dash of special interests
1. Take a bill, any bill will do actually, and combine ingredients. Mix well so taxpayers have a hard time distinguishing what is pork and and what is beneficial to the general public.
2. Debate in front of the press, blaming the opposition for holding up negotiations on the bill.
3. Vote under the political cover of some provisions of the bill, approving the measure even if the majority of Americans think it's a bad idea.
That is exactly what happened in Washington last night, as the Senate moved to approved 74-25 a Wall Street bailout plan that now totals about $800 billion of taxpayer money. The only senator who did not vote was Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) who is recuperating from his serious illness.
Here is video of congressional negotiators discussing what to throw at the problem:
Seriously, the most noteworthy yes votes came from Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), both of who have pledged in the presidential campaign to fight pork barrel spending. Both tossed aside their campaign pledges to the American taxpayers last night.
Here's Obama's policy statement on park-barrel spending as seen on his website, barackobama.com:
Well, that sure didn't happen last night.
McCain is in the same boat. He has often pledged to veto earmarks and pork-barrel spending, most notably in the recent debate where he said he would use his pen to reject such bills, and even pointed to his old pen in his hand. He made the same statements in his speech to the National Small Business Summit in Washington, D.C. last June.
Here is what can be found on JohnMcCain.com, his campaign's official website. The bold face is my addition:
It's discouraging to see that both candidates tossed away their fundamental principals last night. Unfortunately, you and I are the ones who have to dig deeper to pay for it.
USNews.com had this report on the prospects in the House, which rejected a similar bill a few days ago:
Here is the text of the bill, it's a 451-page pdf file if you dare. Lets look at some of the additions to the bill as reported by HotAir.com:
The Financial Times had this to say about the pork, hitting it dead on:
Tons of pork
One cup of lobbyists
A dash of special interests
1. Take a bill, any bill will do actually, and combine ingredients. Mix well so taxpayers have a hard time distinguishing what is pork and and what is beneficial to the general public.
2. Debate in front of the press, blaming the opposition for holding up negotiations on the bill.
3. Vote under the political cover of some provisions of the bill, approving the measure even if the majority of Americans think it's a bad idea.
That is exactly what happened in Washington last night, as the Senate moved to approved 74-25 a Wall Street bailout plan that now totals about $800 billion of taxpayer money. The only senator who did not vote was Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) who is recuperating from his serious illness.
Here is video of congressional negotiators discussing what to throw at the problem:
Seriously, the most noteworthy yes votes came from Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), both of who have pledged in the presidential campaign to fight pork barrel spending. Both tossed aside their campaign pledges to the American taxpayers last night.
Here's Obama's policy statement on park-barrel spending as seen on his website, barackobama.com:
Shine Light on Earmarks and Pork Barrel Spending: Obama's Transparency and Integrity in Earmarks Act will shed light on all earmarks by disclosing the name of the legislator who asked for each earmark, along with a written justification, 72 hours before they can be approved by the full Senate.
Well, that sure didn't happen last night.
McCain is in the same boat. He has often pledged to veto earmarks and pork-barrel spending, most notably in the recent debate where he said he would use his pen to reject such bills, and even pointed to his old pen in his hand. He made the same statements in his speech to the National Small Business Summit in Washington, D.C. last June.
Here is what can be found on JohnMcCain.com, his campaign's official website. The bold face is my addition:
Among the most glaring abuses in Washington is the willful setting aside of taxpayer dollars for the pet projects of special interests, often through last minute additions to appropriations bills. Pork barrel spending is an insult to taxpayers, a waste of public resources, and an abdication of our leaders' responsibility to be good and honorable stewards of the public treasury, for the benefit of all Americans, not just a few.
... As President, John McCain would shine the disinfecting light of public scrutiny on those who abuse the public purse, use the power of the presidency to restore fiscal responsibility, and exercise the veto pen to enforce it.
It's discouraging to see that both candidates tossed away their fundamental principals last night. Unfortunately, you and I are the ones who have to dig deeper to pay for it.
USNews.com had this report on the prospects in the House, which rejected a similar bill a few days ago:
Reporting on the upcoming House vote, The Politico says "caution is still the watchword," but "the revised Senate package blends in more than $100 billion in popular tax breaks as well as aid to rural schools important to House Republicans. And to build support among small town community banks, the bill raises the cap on insured deposits from $100,000 to $250,000." The New York Times also reports House leaders appear "increasingly confident that politically enticing provisions attached to the original bill...would win over at least the dozen or so votes needed to reverse Monday's outcome and send the measure to President Bush." Likewise, the AP says the measure is "gaining ground in the House, where Republicans opposition softened." The Hill offers a similar assessment.
Here is the text of the bill, it's a 451-page pdf file if you dare. Lets look at some of the additions to the bill as reported by HotAir.com:
New Tax earmarks in Bailout bill
- Film and Television Productions (Sec. 502)
- Wooden Arrows designed for use by children (Sec. 503)
- 6 page package of earmarks for litigants in the 1989 Exxon Valdez incident, Alaska (Sec. 504)
Tax earmark “extenders” in the bailout bill.
- Virgin Island and Puerto Rican Rum (Section 308)
- American Samoa (Sec. 309)
- Mine Rescue Teams (Sec. 310)
- Mine Safety Equipment (Sec. 311)
- Domestic Production Activities in Puerto Rico (Sec. 312)
- Indian Tribes (Sec. 314, 315)
- Railroads (Sec. 316)
- Auto Racing Tracks (317)
- District of Columbia (Sec. 322)
- Wool Research (Sec. 325)
The Financial Times had this to say about the pork, hitting it dead on:
Proposed rules on rum excise tax to Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands, the tax treatment of washing machines and “exemption from excise tax for certain wooden arrows designed for use by children” all feature in the financial rescue package being considered by the US Senate.
While the link between such measures and the US administration’s $700bn bail-out proposals might not be immediately clear, in truth they represent a tried and tested approach to deal with problems on Capitol Hill.
The previous compromise proposals, pulled together last weekend, focused on issues directly related to the plan, such as administrative oversight and executive pay. By contrast, the latest attempt to get a deal includes wholly extraneous measures to win the support of individual members and groups in congress.
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
McCain Says Ifill Is 'Totally Objective' and Should Moderate the Debate
Sen. John McCain said this afternoon that he sees no problem with PBS' Gwen Ifill moderating tomorrow night's vice presidential debate between Gov. Sarah Palin and Sen. Joe Biden despite a possible conflict of interest in that she stands to make a lot of money with a Democrat victory in the fall elections because she has written a pro-Obama book.
FOX’s Carl Cameron, interviewing the Arizona senator this afternoon, asked McCain whether Ifill should excuse herself as the debate moderator. McCain said there is a potential conflict of interest but expressed confidence in the longtime journalist.
Campaign officials said they did not know about the book until today even though Ifill’s upcoming publication was mentioned in a Sept. 4 Washington Post profile.
See this article posted earlier today that examines Ifill's possible conflict of interest.
FOX’s Carl Cameron, interviewing the Arizona senator this afternoon, asked McCain whether Ifill should excuse herself as the debate moderator. McCain said there is a potential conflict of interest but expressed confidence in the longtime journalist.
“I think that Gwen Ifill is a professional and I think that she will do a totally objective job because she is a highly respected professional,” McCain said during an interview at the Harry S. Truman Library and Museum. “Does this help…if she has written a book that’s favorable to Senator Obama? Probably not. But I have confidence that Gwen Ifill will do a professional job and I have that confidence.”
Campaign officials said they did not know about the book until today even though Ifill’s upcoming publication was mentioned in a Sept. 4 Washington Post profile.
See this article posted earlier today that examines Ifill's possible conflict of interest.
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
GOP to Let Palin be Palin and Unleash Her to Media
Apparently I have more pull on the Internet than I thought ...
Johnathan Martin of Politico wrote in his blog late yesterday that the McCain campaign has read the reviews about Gov. Sarah Palin's performances in the media interviews and are planning to unleash her to radio talk shows, and at the same time free her from the GOP talking points and let Sarah be Sarah.
Some excerpts from Martin's report:
Last week I wrote this after the first Katie Couric interview:
Now, seriously, I doubt John McCain's campaign team is relying on my advice. But that posting has had the most unique viewers since I started this venture. About 13 percent of this blog's total unique viewers saw that post. The second most viewed post was the video of Palin's appearance at her former church in Wasilla, which 5 percent of News Cycle's unique viewers saw.
Johnathan Martin of Politico wrote in his blog late yesterday that the McCain campaign has read the reviews about Gov. Sarah Palin's performances in the media interviews and are planning to unleash her to radio talk shows, and at the same time free her from the GOP talking points and let Sarah be Sarah.
Some excerpts from Martin's report:
"She's seen the reviews and heard the criticism, but she's a fighter," said this aide. "And now she's in a fighting mood."
Palin heads to McCain's cabin in Arizona today to prepare for her Thursday debate, and while she's there she'll do a round of conservative talk radio interviews.
"Talk radio is a convenient, powerful and effective outlet," said the aide.
Rush Limbaugh, who hosts the most popular radio show in the country, noted in an e-mail that he doesn't invite guests on and alluded to his rocky relationship with the top of the GOP ticket.
"The McCain camp doesn't trust me," Limbaugh said.
But asked if he'd welcome a call from Palin, the conservative talker said: "Of course."
The move to reintroduce Palin comes after much criticism for a stumbling interview she gave to CBS’ Katie Couric last week; increased conservative grousing about the campaign's decision to roll out the GOP vice presidential nominee through high-stakes and high-profile mainstream media interviews; and the suggestion by some observers that she even drop off the ticket.
Quite the contrary, Palin, her family and aides are determined to remind voters what they so liked about the governor in the first place.
After the debate and talk radio hits, the plan is to find a way to let Palin be Palin, moving her away from the pre-fab talking points and letting the down-home daughter of Wasilla be herself.
"She wants to tell her story more, and people around her do, too," added the source. "This is a governor very much on her toes, very much fed up with inaccuracies and fictions about her own life and career."
To this end, Palin was far more aggressive in another interview with Couric today, this aide said
Sitting with McCain for their first joint interview a week after the widely panned sit-down with Couric, Palin interjected when the CBS anchor brought up a report about the Wasilla Assembly of God, the governor's childhood church and one she still attends at times, seeking to pray gays away from homosexuality.
"Sarah Barracuda showed up today," the aide said, reprising the feisty former point guard's high school basketball nickname and one that has been largely forgotten since her post-convention cosseting.
"We're encouraging CBS to run entire thing," the aide said of today's session. "Run it end to end online."
Last week I wrote this after the first Katie Couric interview:
What the McCain campaign should do is to give her the best pre-debate education of the issues it can. Get her up to speed on foreign affairs and domestic problems. But don't craft the answers for her. Let her develop what she is going to say in her own voice. In other words, on Oct. 2, let her be Sarah Palin.
If she's going to be criticized for her answers (she will, MSNBC and others will dissect them syllable by syllable) she might as well give her own thoughts, and not the spin of the campaign. The McCain campaign should unleash her. She can handle Biden on her own. From what we have seen, when allowed to be herself, she can do quite well.
Now, seriously, I doubt John McCain's campaign team is relying on my advice. But that posting has had the most unique viewers since I started this venture. About 13 percent of this blog's total unique viewers saw that post. The second most viewed post was the video of Palin's appearance at her former church in Wasilla, which 5 percent of News Cycle's unique viewers saw.
Monday, September 29, 2008
Should Palin Step Down Because of Couric Interview? Please ...
The calls for Gov. Sarah Palin to step down from the GOP ticket has moved from the blogs to the mainstream media as journalists across the nation have been in a state of shock that she performed poorly during the interview with CBS' Katie Couric.
Fareed Zakaria, the editor of Newsweek International, took the ball from Kathleen Parker from The National Review and published an editorial this morning demanding that the governor from Alaska remove herself from the GOP ticket because of her poor performance.
In a four-paragraph editorial, Zakaria's thesis is that because Palin stumbled on answering Couric's questions she is no way qualified for the office of vice president.
The problem with that thesis is that answering media questions is not what qualifies anybody for high office. If it were, we'd be in trouble with all the candidates.
Case in point: Here's Sen. Joe Biden, well known as a gaffe machine, speaking to, ironically, Couric on how a president can respond to an economic crisis:
Now, we all know that President Roosevelt was not president when the stock market crashed in 1929 (it's what made Herbert Hoover famous). We also know that few televisions existed in the Roaring '20s. So is Biden out of touch for making such a ridiculous argument? Where is the media outrage that he can't put forth a reasonable answer to a reasonable question, and therefore should step down from the campaign?
Biden isn't the only one to misspeak during the campaign. Sen. John McCain has had his share of fumbles in front of a microphone. For instance, he proudly proclaimed at the start of the current financial crisis that if he were president, he would fire Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Christopher Cox for his “betrayal of trust” leading up to this past week’s financial market crisis."
Now, in this case, the problem is that the SEC, which regulates the trading of stocks and bonds, is an independent agency outside the jurisdiction of the White House. While the president nominates and the Senate approves the SEC chairman, there is some doubt on whether a president can actually fire the SEC chair. After a few days of back-and-forth between the McCain campaign and the media about the gaffe, the GOP candidate changed his language to say he would asked for Cox's resignation, not fire him. The media was appropriately tough on McCain, but there were no calls for him to step aside from the campaign for the good of the party.
Or how about this one?
The Spanish press was pounding the McCain campaign for at least one news cycle after the Arizona senator failed to correctly identify Prime Minister José Luis RodrÃguez Zapatero of Spain. The reporter that spoke with McCain said that she had the feeling that McCain didn't know what he was talking about. Some said McCain was confused in the interview, apparently thinking Zapatero was someone from Latin America who is an enemy of the United States. This interview started a minor international controversy; but there were no calls from the media that McCain step down from the campaign because he had misspoken to the press on a foreign affairs matter, which is one of his strong points.
And probably the most famous gaffe of McCain's campaign was when Politico asked the senator how many homes he owned. "I think — I'll have my staff get to you," McCain said. "It's condominiums where — I'll have them get to you."
He's still taking heat for that one. But are there any calls for him to step aside? Not really.
Misspeaking in front of cameras is a bipartisan sport. Some of Sen. Barack Obama's have been outrageous as well. For instance:
How could someone who thinks there are 58 states actually serve as president? How many electoral votes do those extra eight states give the Democrats? This is obviously a slip of the tongue, not a sign of a basic lack of knowledge about geography. But what would the media be saying if Palin made that same mistake. Tina Fey would have a field day on "Saturday Night Live."
There were more serious missteps by Obama. Remember his statement earlier in the campaign that "Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided."
That's a policy statement, and it was one that gave Obama some considerable heat. He had to spend days backtracking on the statement.
Once again, CBS' Couric was in the middle of the fray we she asked the senator: "You said not too long ago that Jerusalem should remain undivided. And then you backtracked on that statement. Does that play into the argument that some believe that someone more experienced would not have made that kind of mistake?"
Obama: "Well, if you look at what happened, there was no shift in policy or backtracking in policy. We just had phrased it poorly in the speech. That has happened and will happen to every politician. You're not always gonna hit your mark in terms of how you phrase your policies. But my policy hasn't changed, and it's been very consistent. It's the same policy that Bill Clinton has put forward, and that says that Jerusalem will be the capital of Israel, that we shouldn't divide it by barbed wire, but that, ultimately that is a final status issue that has to be resolved between the Palestinians and the Israelis."
This was a case where he used code words that upset many Palestinians in part of the world where people die because high-ranking officials use incorrect language. But nobody in the media started to write editorials saying that he should drop out of the race because that he was not qualified for high office because he misspoke to the media.
Here's another case. On his trip to the Middle East, Obama proudly proclaimed that "Now, in terms of knowing my commitments, you don't have to just look at my words, you can look at my deeds. Just this past week, we passed out of the U.S. Senate Banking Committee, which is my committee, a bill to call for divestment from Iran, as a way of ratcheting up the pressure to ensure that they don't obtain a nuclear weapon."
Of course, there was some press concerning this, mostly for one news cycle. Obama is not a member of the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee. Obama took credit for the committee's works as one of his deeds. And while there was some press criticism about it, there were no calls for him to step aside because of a lack of ability to speak into a microphone.
Here's the deal. Palin had a bad interview with Couric. Her answers were not on target. But that does not disqualify her as part of the GOP ticket. An ability to speak to the press has never stopped anyone from succeeding in high office. Every politician on the planet misspeaks and stumbles on their words, usually on a daily basis.
Members of the media have the same amount of power in the presidential elections as other citizens. Each reporter, editor and commentator has one vote, just like you. Journalists do like to think they control the national dialogue. The whole Palin phenomena has been a thorn in the news media's side. Journalists did not see her coming as a candidate, they never approved of the vetting process (because they didn't have a chance to vet her), and she represents a segment of the populace that journalists in New York and Washington have a tough time understanding. In their collective mind, they cannot fathom a person coming out of nowhere, who holds opposite values as they do, potentially jumping in and becoming a very powerful person. In a nutshell, they never approved her. Therefore, in most journalists' mindset, she isn't qualified.
But, it's not the news media's call.
You, and everyone else who goes to the polls in November, are the only ones who gets to decide if she, or any one else is qualified. Don't make your decision based on a candidate's performance with the media. Judge office-seekers by their policies, their past performance in government service and their vision for the future. Those are the only qualifications you need to look at.
In the end, she's not qualified only if the voters, not the media, say so.
Fareed Zakaria, the editor of Newsweek International, took the ball from Kathleen Parker from The National Review and published an editorial this morning demanding that the governor from Alaska remove herself from the GOP ticket because of her poor performance.
In a four-paragraph editorial, Zakaria's thesis is that because Palin stumbled on answering Couric's questions she is no way qualified for the office of vice president.
The problem with that thesis is that answering media questions is not what qualifies anybody for high office. If it were, we'd be in trouble with all the candidates.
Case in point: Here's Sen. Joe Biden, well known as a gaffe machine, speaking to, ironically, Couric on how a president can respond to an economic crisis:
Now, we all know that President Roosevelt was not president when the stock market crashed in 1929 (it's what made Herbert Hoover famous). We also know that few televisions existed in the Roaring '20s. So is Biden out of touch for making such a ridiculous argument? Where is the media outrage that he can't put forth a reasonable answer to a reasonable question, and therefore should step down from the campaign?
Biden isn't the only one to misspeak during the campaign. Sen. John McCain has had his share of fumbles in front of a microphone. For instance, he proudly proclaimed at the start of the current financial crisis that if he were president, he would fire Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Christopher Cox for his “betrayal of trust” leading up to this past week’s financial market crisis."
Now, in this case, the problem is that the SEC, which regulates the trading of stocks and bonds, is an independent agency outside the jurisdiction of the White House. While the president nominates and the Senate approves the SEC chairman, there is some doubt on whether a president can actually fire the SEC chair. After a few days of back-and-forth between the McCain campaign and the media about the gaffe, the GOP candidate changed his language to say he would asked for Cox's resignation, not fire him. The media was appropriately tough on McCain, but there were no calls for him to step aside from the campaign for the good of the party.
Or how about this one?
The Spanish press was pounding the McCain campaign for at least one news cycle after the Arizona senator failed to correctly identify Prime Minister José Luis RodrÃguez Zapatero of Spain. The reporter that spoke with McCain said that she had the feeling that McCain didn't know what he was talking about. Some said McCain was confused in the interview, apparently thinking Zapatero was someone from Latin America who is an enemy of the United States. This interview started a minor international controversy; but there were no calls from the media that McCain step down from the campaign because he had misspoken to the press on a foreign affairs matter, which is one of his strong points.
And probably the most famous gaffe of McCain's campaign was when Politico asked the senator how many homes he owned. "I think — I'll have my staff get to you," McCain said. "It's condominiums where — I'll have them get to you."
He's still taking heat for that one. But are there any calls for him to step aside? Not really.
Misspeaking in front of cameras is a bipartisan sport. Some of Sen. Barack Obama's have been outrageous as well. For instance:
How could someone who thinks there are 58 states actually serve as president? How many electoral votes do those extra eight states give the Democrats? This is obviously a slip of the tongue, not a sign of a basic lack of knowledge about geography. But what would the media be saying if Palin made that same mistake. Tina Fey would have a field day on "Saturday Night Live."
There were more serious missteps by Obama. Remember his statement earlier in the campaign that "Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided."
That's a policy statement, and it was one that gave Obama some considerable heat. He had to spend days backtracking on the statement.
Once again, CBS' Couric was in the middle of the fray we she asked the senator: "You said not too long ago that Jerusalem should remain undivided. And then you backtracked on that statement. Does that play into the argument that some believe that someone more experienced would not have made that kind of mistake?"
Obama: "Well, if you look at what happened, there was no shift in policy or backtracking in policy. We just had phrased it poorly in the speech. That has happened and will happen to every politician. You're not always gonna hit your mark in terms of how you phrase your policies. But my policy hasn't changed, and it's been very consistent. It's the same policy that Bill Clinton has put forward, and that says that Jerusalem will be the capital of Israel, that we shouldn't divide it by barbed wire, but that, ultimately that is a final status issue that has to be resolved between the Palestinians and the Israelis."
This was a case where he used code words that upset many Palestinians in part of the world where people die because high-ranking officials use incorrect language. But nobody in the media started to write editorials saying that he should drop out of the race because that he was not qualified for high office because he misspoke to the media.
Here's another case. On his trip to the Middle East, Obama proudly proclaimed that "Now, in terms of knowing my commitments, you don't have to just look at my words, you can look at my deeds. Just this past week, we passed out of the U.S. Senate Banking Committee, which is my committee, a bill to call for divestment from Iran, as a way of ratcheting up the pressure to ensure that they don't obtain a nuclear weapon."
Of course, there was some press concerning this, mostly for one news cycle. Obama is not a member of the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee. Obama took credit for the committee's works as one of his deeds. And while there was some press criticism about it, there were no calls for him to step aside because of a lack of ability to speak into a microphone.
Here's the deal. Palin had a bad interview with Couric. Her answers were not on target. But that does not disqualify her as part of the GOP ticket. An ability to speak to the press has never stopped anyone from succeeding in high office. Every politician on the planet misspeaks and stumbles on their words, usually on a daily basis.
Members of the media have the same amount of power in the presidential elections as other citizens. Each reporter, editor and commentator has one vote, just like you. Journalists do like to think they control the national dialogue. The whole Palin phenomena has been a thorn in the news media's side. Journalists did not see her coming as a candidate, they never approved of the vetting process (because they didn't have a chance to vet her), and she represents a segment of the populace that journalists in New York and Washington have a tough time understanding. In their collective mind, they cannot fathom a person coming out of nowhere, who holds opposite values as they do, potentially jumping in and becoming a very powerful person. In a nutshell, they never approved her. Therefore, in most journalists' mindset, she isn't qualified.
But, it's not the news media's call.
You, and everyone else who goes to the polls in November, are the only ones who gets to decide if she, or any one else is qualified. Don't make your decision based on a candidate's performance with the media. Judge office-seekers by their policies, their past performance in government service and their vision for the future. Those are the only qualifications you need to look at.
In the end, she's not qualified only if the voters, not the media, say so.
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Obama: I Deserve All the Credit for Bailout Plan, McCain Should Get None
Sen. Barack Obama said this afternoon that Sen. John McCain contributed nothing to the bailout compromise, and that McCain deserves no credit for helping forge a tentative agreement on the $700 billion bailout of Wall Street.
The Democrat said he made sure the proposal includes safeguards for taxpayers. Obama said he is inclined to support the bailout because it includes increased oversight, relief for homeowners facing foreclosure and limits on executive compensation for chief executives of firms that receive government help.
"None of those were in the president's provisions. They are identical to the things I called for the day that [Treasury] Secretary [Henry] Paulson released his package," Obama said. "That I think is an indication of the degree to which when it comes to protecting taxpayers, I was pushing very hard and involved in shaping those provisions."
Appearing on CBS' "Face the Nation," Obama was asked by Bob Schieffer whether McCain deserved credit for bringing lawmakers together, Obama said "No.
"Here are the facts: For two weeks I was on the phone everyday with Secretary Paulson and the congressional leaders making sure that the principles that have been ultimately adopted were incorporated in the bill," Obama said.
Sen, Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) had a different version of the events on Capitol Hill. Appearing on "Fox News Sunday," Graham said McCain worked with House Republicans to achieve plan changes such as government insurance of mortgage-backed securities and a phase-in of federal aid.
"The fact is the House Republicans were not in the mix at all" until McCain arrived at the talks, Graham said. McCain "was decisive in regards to the House being involved."
For his part, McCain passed this morning on taking credit for the bailout compromise.
He was asked on ABC's "This Week With George Stephanopoulos," if he deserved some praise for helping forge a deal, given his much-publicized suspension of his presidential campaign.
"I'll let you and others be the judge of that," he replied.
"I wasn't going to phone it in. I'm a Teddy Roosevelt Republican. I've got to get in the arena. ... I won't claim a bit of credit, if that makes 'em happy."
The Democrat said he made sure the proposal includes safeguards for taxpayers. Obama said he is inclined to support the bailout because it includes increased oversight, relief for homeowners facing foreclosure and limits on executive compensation for chief executives of firms that receive government help.
"None of those were in the president's provisions. They are identical to the things I called for the day that [Treasury] Secretary [Henry] Paulson released his package," Obama said. "That I think is an indication of the degree to which when it comes to protecting taxpayers, I was pushing very hard and involved in shaping those provisions."
Appearing on CBS' "Face the Nation," Obama was asked by Bob Schieffer whether McCain deserved credit for bringing lawmakers together, Obama said "No.
"Here are the facts: For two weeks I was on the phone everyday with Secretary Paulson and the congressional leaders making sure that the principles that have been ultimately adopted were incorporated in the bill," Obama said.
Sen, Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) had a different version of the events on Capitol Hill. Appearing on "Fox News Sunday," Graham said McCain worked with House Republicans to achieve plan changes such as government insurance of mortgage-backed securities and a phase-in of federal aid.
"The fact is the House Republicans were not in the mix at all" until McCain arrived at the talks, Graham said. McCain "was decisive in regards to the House being involved."
For his part, McCain passed this morning on taking credit for the bailout compromise.
He was asked on ABC's "This Week With George Stephanopoulos," if he deserved some praise for helping forge a deal, given his much-publicized suspension of his presidential campaign.
"I'll let you and others be the judge of that," he replied.
"I wasn't going to phone it in. I'm a Teddy Roosevelt Republican. I've got to get in the arena. ... I won't claim a bit of credit, if that makes 'em happy."
Saturday, September 27, 2008
House GOP Still Balking at Bailout Plan as Talks Continue
House Republicans on Saturday held steadfast in their opposition to the $700 billion bailout proposal being considered in Congress, saying that it would be too costly for taxpayers.
House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) told reporters at the Capitol that his members will not agree to a bill “that bails out Wall Street at the expense of American taxpayers.”
"Somebody, maybe it was Einstein, said things should be done as quickly as possible, but no quicker than possible," Republican Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) told the reporters. "We're not moving on any kind of artificial timeline. We're moving toward the very best solution in the shortest period of time."
But Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said he hoped a framework for an agreement could be in place before 6 p.m. Sunday Eastern, before the markets open in Asia for Monday's trading.
"The goal is to come up with a final agreement by tomorrow," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said from the floor of the Senate. "We may not be able to do that, but we're trying very hard."
The Wall Street Journal's Corey Boles and Michael R. Crittenden reported this afternoon that there were signs that lawmakers and the Treasury Department remain divided on how the $700 billion authority to buy up toxic assets will be meted out.
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) returned to Washington after his presidential debate with Sen. Barack Obama (R-Ill.) in Mississippi last night. His campaign office told Politico that Republicans want McCain's participation in the process to be seen by the public in a better light.
Patrick O'Connor of Politico writes this afternoon:
O'Connor also delves into the political maneuvering earlier in the week that seemed to put an agreement on hold:
House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) told reporters at the Capitol that his members will not agree to a bill “that bails out Wall Street at the expense of American taxpayers.”
"Somebody, maybe it was Einstein, said things should be done as quickly as possible, but no quicker than possible," Republican Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) told the reporters. "We're not moving on any kind of artificial timeline. We're moving toward the very best solution in the shortest period of time."
But Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said he hoped a framework for an agreement could be in place before 6 p.m. Sunday Eastern, before the markets open in Asia for Monday's trading.
"The goal is to come up with a final agreement by tomorrow," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said from the floor of the Senate. "We may not be able to do that, but we're trying very hard."
The Wall Street Journal's Corey Boles and Michael R. Crittenden reported this afternoon that there were signs that lawmakers and the Treasury Department remain divided on how the $700 billion authority to buy up toxic assets will be meted out.
Lawmakers want Treasury to receive the authority in tranches, receiving $250 billion immediately and another $100 billion if needed as certified by the president. The remaining $350 billion would be subject to a congressional vote, giving lawmakers the opportunity to vote to rescind the funds.
But a Senate aide familiar with the discussions said Treasury is pushing for a larger initial authority, likely around $500 billion.
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) returned to Washington after his presidential debate with Sen. Barack Obama (R-Ill.) in Mississippi last night. His campaign office told Politico that Republicans want McCain's participation in the process to be seen by the public in a better light.
Patrick O'Connor of Politico writes this afternoon:
The latest House GOP posturing comes amid a Republican effort to ensure John McCain is credited with whatever progress is made in the talks.
McCain arrived back in Washington just before dawn Saturday, and his campaign said he planned to “resume negotiations with the administration and Congressional leaders from both parties to forge a bipartisan solution to our economic crisis.”
Republicans are clearly worried that their presidential candidate’s first effort to engage in the bailout negotiations didn’t come off as well as they might have hoped – that in the public’s mind, a deal was close until McCain parachuted in, a White House meeting collapsed and McCain left for the debate in Mississippi with the various factions farther from a deal than they’d been before.
House Republicans are now trying hard to recast those events.
What actually happened, they say: By not taking a stand on the modified version of the Treasury Plan that Democrats, Senate Republicans and the White House seemed nearly ready to support, McCain gave House Republican the time they needed to force a better deal for taxpayers and homeowners alike.
During a brief session in the Capitol on Friday, McCain reminded a small band of Republican leaders that he had given them a political opening in the landmark legislative fight.
According to people present, McCain then told his congressional colleagues, “Now, go get something.”
O'Connor also delves into the political maneuvering earlier in the week that seemed to put an agreement on hold:
While McCain greeted his top allies on Capitol Hill, lawmakers were working toward a compromise deal in a bipartisan, bicameral meeting. When that meeting ended, both Dodd, the Democratic chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, and Bennett said that negotiators had agreed on a plan that could pass both houses of Congress and be signed by the president.
Gregg, a Republican from New Hampshire, told Politico Friday that the compromise wouldn’t have come together so quickly if Democrats didn’t know that McCain was on his way. “We wouldn’t have had as much movement [Thursday] as we did have, if he hadn’t come to town and some of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle wanted to upstage him,” Gregg said.
With the deal struck, Republicans in the House believed that the trap was set, not so much for McCain as for their own leader, Boehner.
As House Republicans saw it, Democrats and the White House were close to a deal and just needed McCain to sign on so they could roll Boehner under the bus and claim a bipartisan victory.
... But if the Democrats and the White House were ready for a game of “ganging up on Boehner” – as the minority leader said later – McCain didn’t play along.
FactCheck.Org: Both Obama and McCain Misstated Facts in Debate
Sens. John McCain and Barack Obama often contradicted each other last night, and each volunteered some factual misstatements as well. FactCheck.org spent the night evaluating the statements. The site concluded:
FactCheck.org has more details on each misstep.
Obama said McCain adviser Henry Kissinger backs talks with Iran “without preconditions,” but McCain disputed that. In fact, Kissinger did recently call for “high level” talks with Iran starting at the secretary of state level and said, “I do not believe that we can make conditions.” After the debate the McCain campaign issued a statement quoting Kissinger as saying he didn’t favor presidential talks with Iran.
Obama denied voting for a bill that called for increased taxes on “people” making as little as $42,000 a year, as McCain accused him of doing. McCain was right, though only for single taxpayers. A married couple would have had to make $83,000 to be affected by the vote, and anyway no such increase is in Obama’s tax plan.
McCain and Obama contradicted each other on what Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen said about troop withdrawals. Mullen said a time line for withdrawal could be “very dangerous” but was not talking specifically about “Obama’s plan,” as McCain maintained.
McCain tripped up on one of his signature issues – special appropriation “earmarks.” He said they had “tripled in the last five years,” when in fact they have decreased sharply.
Obama claimed Iraq “has” a $79 billion surplus. It once was projected to be as high as that. It’s now down to less than $60 billion.
McCain repeated his overstated claim that the U.S. pays $700 billion a year for oil to hostile nations. Imports are running at about $536 billion this year, and a third of it comes from Canada, Mexico and the U.K.
Obama said 95 percent of “the American people” would see a tax cut under his proposal. The actual figure is 81 percent of households.
Obama mischaracterized an aspect of McCain’s health care plan, saying “employers” would be taxed on the value of health benefits provided to workers. Employers wouldn’t, but the workers would. McCain also would grant workers up to a $5,000 tax credit per family to cover health insurance.
McCain misrepresented Obama's plan by claiming he'd be "handing the health care system over to the federal government." Obama would expand some government programs but would allow people to keep their current plans or chose from private ones, as well.
McCain claimed Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower had drafted a letter of resignation from the Army to be sent in case the 1944 D-Day landing at Normandy turned out to be a failure. Ike prepared a letter taking responsibility, but he didn’t mention resigning.
FactCheck.org has more details on each misstep.
Early Poll Indicates Obama Won Debate
Most Democrats say Sen. Barack Obama held his ground on the foreign policy portion of the debate and scored well on the economy. Republicans say Sen. John McCain exhibited superior knowledge on foreign affairs and look more presidential.
But what did independents and undecided voters say?
CBS News and Knowledge Networks conducted a poll of about 500 uncommitted voters reacting to the debate in the minutes after it happened.
An online MSNBC poll has Obama up 52 percent to 34 percent at 1 a.m. Eastern Saturday. That poll is unscientific and would have a larger percentages of Democrats participating because of the demographics of the network's viewership. But there were more than 350,000 voters. About 250,000 votes have been cast on Drudge, and McCain has a 67 percent to 31 percent edge there.
Most cable network pundits saw the debate through their political prisms. David Gergen on CNN saw it as a tie, but that was good for Obama as he felt McCain needed to win after the rough week he had. "John McCain needed a clear victory tonight," he said. "I think a tie was not in his interest. He is behind. And this is his best subject night ... I think he needed a clear victory tonight and that eluded him."
The McCain campaign was quick to release an ad showing Obama agreeing with McCain on a number of issues during the debate:
But what did independents and undecided voters say?
CBS News and Knowledge Networks conducted a poll of about 500 uncommitted voters reacting to the debate in the minutes after it happened.
Thirty-nine percent of uncommitted voters who watched the debate tonight thought Barack Obama was the winner. Twenty-four percent thought John McCain won. Thirty-seven percent saw it as a draw. Forty-six percent of uncommitted voters said their opinion of Obama got better tonight. Thirty-two percent said their opinion of McCain got better.
Sixty-six percent of uncommitted voters think Obama would make the right decisions about the economy. Forty-two percent think McCain would. Forty-eight percent of these voters think Obama would make the right decisions about Iraq. Fifty-six percent think McCain would.
An online MSNBC poll has Obama up 52 percent to 34 percent at 1 a.m. Eastern Saturday. That poll is unscientific and would have a larger percentages of Democrats participating because of the demographics of the network's viewership. But there were more than 350,000 voters. About 250,000 votes have been cast on Drudge, and McCain has a 67 percent to 31 percent edge there.
Most cable network pundits saw the debate through their political prisms. David Gergen on CNN saw it as a tie, but that was good for Obama as he felt McCain needed to win after the rough week he had. "John McCain needed a clear victory tonight," he said. "I think a tie was not in his interest. He is behind. And this is his best subject night ... I think he needed a clear victory tonight and that eluded him."
The McCain campaign was quick to release an ad showing Obama agreeing with McCain on a number of issues during the debate:
Friday, September 26, 2008
McCain Ad Highlights Obama's Remark on Meeting Hugo Chavez
FactCheck.org took a look at this latest McCain ad that touches on Sen. Barack Obama's statement that he would meet with Hugo Chavez without preconditions. The ad is playing in Florida along with a Spanish verison.
The facts cited by the announcer in this ad are all correct. They go back to an answer he gave in a Democratic primary debate in 2007:
Question, July 27, 2007 debate: In 1982, Anwar Sadat traveled to Israel, a trip that resulted in a peace agreement that has lasted ever since. In the spirit of that type of bold leadership, would you be willing to meet separately, without precondition, during the first year of your administration, in Washington or anywhere else, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea, in order to bridge the gap that divides our countries?
Obama: I would. And the reason is this, that the notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them — which has been the guiding diplomatic principle of this administration — is ridiculous.
Now, Ronald Reagan and Democratic presidents like JFK constantly spoke to Soviet Union at a time when Ronald Reagan called them an evil empire. And the reason is because they understood that we may not trust them and they may pose an extraordinary danger to this country, but we had the obligation to find areas where we can potentially move forward.
And I think that it is a disgrace that we have not spoken to them…
The Associated Press reported that the ad was condemned by the Venezuela Information Office. The office said it is an "attempt at fear-mongering" that demonizes Venezuela and Chavez. The U.S.-based office, which is funded by Chavez's government, said his words "were taken out of context and used as a baseless attack."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)